You can always rely on Dick to take it that one extra step for "national security." Last June, his office refused to hand over confidential documents to the Information Security Oversight Office, or the ISOO. The ISOO is is responsible to the President of the United States for policy and oversight of the Government-wide security classification system and the National Industrial Security Program. The ISOO is a component of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and receives policy and program guidance from the National Security Council (NSC).It's chief goals are:
1. Promote and enhances the system that protects the national security information that safeguards the American Government and its people.
2. Provide for an informed America public by ensuring that the minimum information necessary to the interest of national security is classified and that information is declassified as soon as it no longer requires protection.
3. Promotes and enhances concepts that facilitate the sharing of information in the fulfillment of mission-critical functions related to national security.
4. Provides expert advice and guidance pertinent to the principles of information security.
In June of 2007, Dick decided that he didn't have to hand over documents to the ISOO any longer. The head of the ISOO, Bill Leonard, told Rep. Henry Waxman that Cheney had asserted that his office was not part of the executive branch (!!!???) and was not required to follow certain rules, set forth in presidential orders, regarding the disclosure of classified documents or submit to routine required inspections. In a letter to Cheney, Rep. Waxman asserted that Leonard had inquired after the documents twice, after which Cheney attempted to get rid of the ISOO altogether.
Former Cheney aide Ron Christie said that the legal rationale employed by the Office of the Vice President is that it is not "an entity within the Executive Branch, " due to the fact that the Vice President also serves as the President of the Senate. At the same time, Cheney has used his "executive privilege" to deny congressional information requests. In late June–July of 2007, a number of mainstream media outlets such as TIME Magazine and CBS News began focusing on whether Cheney had created a "fourth branch of government" that was subject to no laws.
Well, isn't that great? Dick seems to think that laws don't apply to him. I wonder why that it is? And why is it that when it comes to the office of the VP turning over documents relating to the NSA wiretapping program that we see stuff like this?
The Vice President isn't in the Executive Branch.....please......what's next? Maybe he'll shoot someone and get away with it...
17 comments:
The pinacle of his arrogance, no doubt, and perhaps the beginning of his downfall? One can only hope
Wait a minute. When did this happen? June? I was in the Middle East then so I must have missed it...is this really true? I can't believe I missed this.
It’s always fun to see liberals such as yourselves getting pissed off at things you can’t do anything about.
Yeah, lets scrap the whole NSA operation because the operation "might" be wrongfully used. Withholding material about intelligence operations that may reveal contacts, sources or methods is a good idea in my book. Maybe Dick doesn’t want to release any more information about things like the NSA because he doesn’t want to see National Security information splashed all over the New York Times. I have no problem with the government keeping things like this classified.
Hell, maybe he did that just to piss all of you off. I’m not saying you can’t be pissed off but don’t come back on here next week and say you are "tough on terror". You can rant on about how outraged you are at Cheney but there are a good number of Americans that now see that our enemies learned information they should not have because some of you feel you have some "right to know".
After 9/11, any president who was not spying on people calling phone numbers associated with terrorists should be impeached for being an inept commander in chief and a complete PC idiot.
The NSA intercept program is intended to capture foreign intelligence information. If you have evidence (not accusations, actual convictions of people misusing the program) that it is being used in areas other than it was intended then I’ll stand with you in getting the bums misusing it out of office. Thus far you have no proof, no convictions in court, just accusations.
Taking a cue from rld...
It's always fun to see conservatives such as yourself believe that men like Dick Cheney always act in our nation's best interest.
How naive can you be....
No offense, Torch, but that could be the biggest "swing and a miss" of a posting I've ever seen. Either you have a sense of humor that is so subtle that I completely missed the joke (which I freely admit is entirely possible) or you've made the most inaccurate assumptions and leap in logic I've seen to date. RLD's post had nothing to do with naivete or believing that people like Cheney always act in our nation's best interest.
Sorry. I shouldn't have butted in. RLD doesn't need or want my help.
That's alright pl. You are correct in pointing out that I never said Cheney was pure as the driven snow.
Responses like the one Torch gave are typical when someone doesn't have any facts to counteract what I typed. They just "know" the program is being misused (without any actual proof) and that's good enough for them.
I don't think its any leap of faith to suggest that Cheney (a product of a certain group of men who came of age under Rich Nixon) uses the program for reasons other than "protecting" our nation.
What dissapoints me is that two folks, pl and rld, who are supposedly skeptical of big government, suddenly require concrete proof...as if that is ever going to happen given the resources that these people have at their disposal.
As long as you BELIEVE (and that's just what it is) that the NSA wiretapping program is for the benefit our country's safety, your cries of "government interfering with our rights" will be laughed at long and hard.
Read this:
http://www.gunowners.org/patriotii.htm
http://www.gunowners.org/pr0309.htm
Now do you get it?
So requiring proof of lawbreaking or stating the fact that someone is innocent until proven guilty is "crying"? I see it isn't an "accusation" anymore, it's now being called a "suggestion".
I haven't mentioned anything about government interfering with anyones rights either with regards to this. Where are you getting that Markadelphia?
One of the legitimate functions of government is to protect it's citizens and to enforce the laws of our nation. I don't think the government should provide healthcare in full to everybody and I don't think government should redistribute wealth.
According to the links above, The Patriot Act I and II (of which the NSA spying program is a part of) ARE breaking laws, under the Constitution. Did you read the links?
These are conservatives, mind you, that are saying that the government is not using these laws to protect its citizens but are, in fact, using them to consolidate power. Read through the first link again and tell me that there is still no proof of lawbreaking on the part of Bush-Cheney.
Yep…according to those links, the NSA Terrorist Surveillance Program is breaking the law. …according to those links... …according to “Gun Owners of America”... Well, according to “Me”, I think they’re all full of BS. And according to Joe, NSA doesn’t go far enough. …and according to some intellectual giants here, the entire GOP should be shipped off to Siberia. Kind of sounds like it’s just someone’s opinion to me… Just because some of the nuts on the right side of the political spectrum happen to side with some of the nuts on the left side, it doesn’t make it so.
…a lot of people ‘came of age’ under Nixon. My dad did. Is everyone from that generation tainted?
…and if we’re going to go back to the dark ages... Let’s talk about some other wire taps of note…been reading a bit of late on Robert Kennedy (or “Bobby” as liberals like to call him, because they’re on a first name basis) and his wiretaps of everybody and their brother, including Martin Luther King (or Martin, as liberals like to call him, because they’re all on a first name basis…).
I call him Dr. King. Was it Bobby that wanted the wiretaps or was it Hoover, who was convinced Dr. King was a communist?
...can't say I know. But where does the buck stop? Today, if an army private harasses an Iraqi civilian and liberals want to take it all the way to the top and fire the Sec. of Def. and the President over the matter, then surely Sen. Kennedy should have been somewhat culpable...per liberals standards, anyway.
...and Kennedy's signature was on the order for the wiretap, whereas in any of the alledged offenses in Iraqi, there was no explicit Presidential signature to carry out said offense.
Are those the same gun owners who were regularly mocked by the leftys on this blog as mouth breathing hicks with no teeth from the south?
Now we're supposed to listen to them?
Amazing how you can switch back and forth so easily depending on what they say.
FDR was a huge fan of wiretapping as well, mostly domestic. What a terrible president!!!
...and given the Arkansas contingent's track record, will our next President use wiretaps more or less freely? Come now...someone who'll use the FBI for research on her opponents won't have too many qualms about using these resources on the real bad guys.
Wiretapping is abused no matter who is in power. I complained long and hard about Big Brother in the 1990 but I didn't have a blog then so perhaps there is no way for you to know.
I was very shortsighted about gun owners and I have since apologized for it-most of it anyway.
Post a Comment